Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 60 views

    Article 22 Villalva vs. RCBC Savings Bank

    Uploaded by

    Carlota Nicolas Villaroman
    This document summarizes a court case between Villalva spouses and RCBC Savings Bank regarding a loan taken out by the spouses to purchase a Toyota Corolla. The spouses took out promissory notes secured by a chattel mortgage on the vehicle. Part of the mortgage agreement required the spouses to insure the vehicle. For one period, the spouses failed to deliver the insurance policy on time, so RCBC insured the vehicle and paid the premium. The court ruled that the spouses had not defaulted on their obligation as RCBC failed to notify them before applying their payments to the insurance premium. The spouses were also not enriched since they had already obtained the required insurance for that period.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Article 22 Villalva vs. RCBC Savings Bank

    Uploaded by

    Carlota Nicolas Villaroman
    60 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case between Villalva spouses and RCBC Savings Bank regarding a loan taken out by the spouses to purchase a Toyota Corolla. The spouses took out promissory notes secured by a chattel mortgage on the vehicle. Part of the mortgage agreement required the spouses to insure the vehicle. For one period, the spouses failed to deliver the insurance policy on time, so RCBC insured the vehicle and paid the premium. The court ruled that the spouses had not defaulted on their obligation as RCBC failed to notify them before applying their payments to the insurance premium. The spouses were also not enriched since they had already obtained the required insurance for that period.

    Original Description:

    .

    Original Title

    a22

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a court case between Villalva spouses and RCBC Savings Bank regarding a loan taken out by the spouses to purchase a Toyota Corolla. The spouses took out promissory notes secured by a chattel mortgage on the vehicle. Part of the mortgage agreement required the spouses to insure the vehicle. For one period, the spouses failed to deliver the insurance policy on time, so RCBC insured the vehicle and paid the premium. The court ruled that the spouses had not defaulted on their obligation as RCBC failed to notify them before applying their payments to the insurance premium. The spouses were also not enriched since they had already obtained the required insurance for that period.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    60 views2 pages

    Article 22 Villalva vs. RCBC Savings Bank

    Uploaded by

    Carlota Nicolas Villaroman
    This document summarizes a court case between Villalva spouses and RCBC Savings Bank regarding a loan taken out by the spouses to purchase a Toyota Corolla. The spouses took out promissory notes secured by a chattel mortgage on the vehicle. Part of the mortgage agreement required the spouses to insure the vehicle. For one period, the spouses failed to deliver the insurance policy on time, so RCBC insured the vehicle and paid the premium. The court ruled that the spouses had not defaulted on their obligation as RCBC failed to notify them before applying their payments to the insurance premium. The spouses were also not enriched since they had already obtained the required insurance for that period.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    ARTICLE 22

    VILLALVA VS. RCBC SAVINGS BANK


    Facts: Petitioner spouses issued 48 checks totalling P547 392 to cover instalment
    payment due on promissory notes executed in favor of Toyota, Quezon Avenue for
    the purpose of a Toyota Corolla. The promissory notes were secured by a chattel
    mortgage executed by the petitioner spouses on the vehicle in favor of TQA. Under
    the deed of chattel mortgage, petitioner spouses were to insure the vehicle against
    loss or damage by accident, theft and fire, and endorse and deliver polices to the
    mortgagor.
    Thereafter, the promissory notes and chattel mortgage were assigned to RCBC.
    They were later assigned to the RCBC Savings Bank. The 48 checks were encashed
    by the respondent RCBC Savings Bank.
    Evidence shows that petitioner spouses faithfully complied with the obligation to
    insure the mortgaged vehicle from 1993 until 1996. For a period of 1996 to 1997,
    petitioner spouses procured the necessary insurance but wasnt able to deliver it on
    time. As a consequence, respondent had the mortgaged vehicle insured for the
    period 1996-1997 and paid 14 523.36 insurance premium. The insurance policy
    obtained by the respondent was later cancelled due to the insurance policy secured
    by petitioners over the mortgaged vehicle. The insurance policy secured by
    petitioner spouses over the mortgaged vehicle was reimbursed to the respondent
    bank that amounts to P10 939.86 by the Malayan Insurance Company. The premium
    paid by the respondent bank exceeded the reimbursed amount.
    The bank sent a letter of demand allegedly representing the unpaid obligations of
    the petitioners. Should they fail to comply, the bank orders for the spouses to
    surrender the corolla. The spouses ignored the demand letter.
    Respondent issued filed a complaint for Recovery of Possession with Replevin with
    the MTC, and so respondent recovered the possession of the mortgaged vehicle.
    Spouses filed their Answer with the Compulsory Counterclaim for moral damages,
    exemplary damages, and attorneys fees. The MTC ruled in favor of the petitioners
    and the CA affirmed the decision of the MTC.
    Issue: whether the petitioners failed to comply with their obligation to insure the
    subject vehicle under the Deed of Chattel Mortgage (1) requires the petitioner to
    secure the necessary insurance and 2) deliver the policies so endorsed to the
    respondent on the day of the execution of this mortage)
    Ruling: Due to the mortgagees failure to notify the mortgagors prior to application
    of the latters payment to the insurance premiums, this court held that the
    mortgagors had not defaulted on their obligation to secure insurance over the
    mortgaged vehicle. Petitioner spouses were not enriched when respondent obtained

    insurance coverage for the mortgaged vehicle as the spouses had already obtained
    the required insurance coverage for the vehicle from 1996-1997.
    Notes: Presence of quasi contractual obligations in the New Civil Code.
    Enrichment consists of every patrimonial, physical or moral advantage, so long as it
    is appreciable money. It may also take form of avoidance of expenses and other
    indispensable reductions in the patrimony of a person. May include prevention of
    loss or injury.

    You might also like